DEAN FULLER IMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Although the trial court sentenced appellant under the habitual felony offender statute, section 775.084(l)(a), (4)(a), Florida Statutes (1999), and the violent career criminal statute, section 775.084(l)(d), (4)(d), Florida Statutes (1999), appellant has shown no double jeopardy violation because he will serve only one sentence with a minimum mandatory term, as provided for by the violent career criminal statute. Cf. Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000) (holding that two concurrent sentences, pursuant to the prison releasee reoffender statute and the habitual felony offender statute, imposed upon appellant for a single offense, do not violate the double jeopardy clause of the United States Constitution).
AFFIRMED.
BARFIELD, C.J., KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Demoine Works v. State, 814 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…rect sentencing errors was decided. We also note that in two cases decided prior to Oberst, the courts upheld sentences that were imposed under both the habitual felony offender stat- ' ute and the violent career criminal statute. See Iman v. State, 784 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (involving a double jeopardy analysis); Dennis v. State, 784 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (involving an analysis under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000)). Because Iman and Dennis were…
-
Clines v. State, 881 So. 2d 721 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…he Fourth District Court of Appeal in Oberst v. State, 796 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). The Second District followed Oberst in Works v. State, 814 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). In response, the State relies upon our decision in Iman v. State, 784 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), holding in a similar situation that no double jeopardy violation is shown because the resulting sentence is only one sentence with a minimum mandatory term. Appellant counters that Iman does not control because Iman only looked…
-
Denyer v. State, 845 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…w contend that the sentence is a double jeopardy violation. Further, Denyer received a minimum mandatory sentence that ran concurrent for both cases. There is no double jeopardy violation when the sentences are to run concurrent. See Iman v. State, 784 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)(appellant who was sentenced under the habitual felony offender statute and the violent career criminal statute has shown no double jeopardy violation because he will serve only one sentence with a minimum mandatory term); compare…
Authorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)